November 2 1966
The Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation got a bad press last last week. The press conference which it put on last Wednesday to launch its international war crimes tribunal was crowded out; but little appeared next day, and that was mostly uncomplimentary.
But for people who are concerned about the war in Vietnan, the tribunal raises some important questions; it cannot simply be ghrugged off.
In his statement to the press last week, Lord Russell explained that in 1963, he was "profoundly disturbed by the mounting evidence in the Western press of the atrocious acts taking place in Vietnam." Ina letter to the New York Times, he said: "The United States government is conducting a war of annihilation in Vietnam." Since then, he said, this assessment had been confirmed; it was therefore necessary to convene a "solemn tribunal," whose mandate was to "uncover and tell all." It was "an offer of the truth, born of intense and unyielding enguiry."
Lord Russell also pointed out that his tribunal would be composed of men "eminent not through their power, but through their intellectual and moral contribution to what we optimistically call ‘human civilisation' ... We command no armies and compel no audience to hear us."
The feeling in Lord Kussell's statement is unmistakable, and he himself says: "I will not conceal from you the profundity of my admiration and passion for the people of Vietnam." To expose the truth about the dreadful things which are happening to the people of Vietnam is an aim which all could and should support. Why, then, has there been so much criticism of the tribunal?
The tribunal, according to last week's statement by its members, will have to answer, "amongst others," the following questions:
i a
1. Has the United States government (and the governments of
Australia, New Zealand and South Korea) committed acts of
aggression according to international law? 2. Has the American Army made use of or experimented with new
weapons or weapons forbidden by the laws of war (gas, special